JMortensen

I don't think so. Bring a Nissan lug nut to compare.

The RX7 cooler is supposed to be very good, but definitely run a thermostat in Norway!!! Otherwise your frozen oil won't be doing much good for your turbo.

Someone ran it with no coolant for a while. I have an E31 where the coolant holes are all eroded, not quite bad enough to warrant welding yet...

Should be fine. Backlash generally doesn't "go out". You set it and forget it.

The ring and pinion are inside the diff. If you swap the whole diff, then you've swapped the ring and pinion. If you take both of them apart and take the gears out of one and put into the other, you've just made your job 10x harder. The CV's are the Constant Velocity shafts that plug into the sides of the diff and bolt onto the flange at the wheel with 6 bolts. Take the 6 bolts off, pry the CV's out of the side of the diff with a prybar. Install the new diff put the CV's back in.

Get the 1.5 studs. Get Toyota 4 Runner lug nuts (same shank size as Nissan lug nuts). Cut the ends off. Now you have 12 x 1.5 open end Nissan shank lug nuts. I got a set of 16 from a tire shop for $5 I think...

It will bolt right in. Just get the 87-89 diff and bolt it in. Don't bother switching the ring and pinion from one housing to the other, they use the same housings. So just take one diff out, put the other diff in, use your existing CVs.

How many X's can you spot in this picture? http://rally.subaru.com/rally/servlet/CarBuildingDetail?part=1&imageId=23 Another cage with a big X from the hoop to the rear suspension pickups. http://e30m3performance.com/tech_articles/cage_symposium/e46-1/index.htm IIRC the old SCCA rules said you could run a diagonal brace from the driver's side head area to the passenger floor, or you could run an X back to the strut towers. John Coffey chose the X to the strut towers which says a lot, but that was back when you could run 1.5 x .090 IIRC.

Looks like a normal CLSD to me. Shafts look similar to the 300ZXT shafts, why they didn't just take the 4 bolts out instead of cutting the shaft is beyond me...

The way to get at these things is like J said to go through the holes on the inside of the rocker, Then to go down from the holes in the doglegs (you'll have to remove the interior trim piece. Then use a wand like this: http://www.eastwoodco.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=10966&itemType=PRODUCT&RS=1&keyword=rust If you have to drill holes, drill them in inconspicous areas then plug with these:http://www.eastwoodco.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=1110&itemType=PRODUCT&iProductID=1110 Based on my experience, you might also want to get inside the frame rails at the front and the back. I know you're in Oz, but you should be able to find something similar there I would think. One nice thing about the oil is it penetrates the rust, so if you hit a small corner of a rusty section it will wick up and into the rusty area... if Krown's advertising is to be believed...

Looks like this design shows the hoop attaching to the rear strut towers. Can't really do that because the rear strut towers are well behind the roof crossmember. Also I'd forget about bracing to the very back of the car unless you're particularly worried about impacts to the rear. More important to brace the strut towers as much as possible since they're flexible and control your camber angles in turns. Since the main hoop can't really do that as your drawing shows (unless maybe 2+2???) your cross brace can attach to the strut towers - that's how johnc did it. But attaching some substantial part of the cage to the strut towers is very important. I love 74's car but I'm not that talented. My solution is to stitch weld the chassis, install a roll bar that attaches to the roof, the rear of the rocker panels and the strut towers, weld in rear strut bar, triangulated front strut bar, and Bad Dog's new subframe connectors. I'll probably have a couple more braces here and there, but that's the main part of the structure anyway.

Doesn't really look that much different than my Mikunis on a Cannon manifold with a short stack. Probably within 1" or 2" in length. I talked to Malvern and Rebello, and they both seemed to think that I had done a good thing ditching the shorter Mikuni manifold.

Carbon.

Don't know much about EBC, but I'd try an HPS+ on the Hawks. The HPS+ seems to have almost as high a heat tolerance as the Blacks. That's what I've decided on for my Wilwoods.

BINGO!!! At autox I sidestep the clutch at 3500-4000 and let the rears spin for a bit. If you let the clutch out at ease onto the gas at 1200 rpm you do get a vastly different result. This girl was a test driver for BMW. She really can drive, and she's owned Z's for the last 15 years. She's the exception to the rule...

My experience vs a friends nicely built cammed L28 with SU's is different. From a stop, I can blow her doors off. From a ~60 mph roll, I can blow her doors off. The only time she stands a chance is if I slow down in any given gear to say 2000 rpm then floor it. That's when my car bogs down. If I downshift, I'm gone. You don't have to drive hers "on the pipe" though, which is why I would say that the SU's are a better street carb. I've found that most of the people who drive triples on the street don't know what the hell they're doing. If you want to see some properly tuned triples, go to a racetrack. But those guys could give a crap about drag racing, and that's why, IMO, the triples get the bad rap. The difference between the two is freakin unbelievable, but I think I'm done trying to convince you guys. If only Norm would pony up for some 44's and tune them correctly... then you'd understand...

Why do you want a 6 speed? What would the purpose be? If you're looking for closer ratios the T56 isn't really going to help that much. Basically just gives you another super overdrive. If you're looking for increased torque capacity then you can justify the T56. Still, it isn't going to be cheap and it is going to add weight.

I agree that you've done nice work Norm. I just don't think the calculations are worth a squat...

228whp according to the calculator. Still seems high by your estimate...

OK, and that sounds realistic to me too. I don't know the weight of your car, but I plugged in 2500 (with driver) and your trap speed and the calculator here http://www.race-cars.net/calculators/et_calculator.html shows 240 wheel hp.

That's fine. When you lock down the nut on the end, it captures the sleeve, then the sleeve rotates in the poly when the suspension moves.

There is supposed to be a sleeve that fits over the spindle pin AND the bushings that go into the control arm. You'll definitely need the sleeves, and it sounds like that is what is missing.

I agree with Mike, but in Dan's case if you remove all the bushings the car is definitely going to track worse. Bushings give compliance and that allows the suspension to move around without affecting the way the car is pointed. Take out the compliance and you'll feel every little bump in the road and the car will follow every little rut. It will be more predictable at 10/10ths with the roadracing type setup, but it won't be nearly as friendly driving around town.

One more interesting point about the dyno vs ET hp calculation: http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=107745 Looks like the JNJ Drag Racing guys were calculating ~750whp in their Z, but when they put it on a dyno they showed 453whp. 300hp difference means that something is fishy. Don't really know what that says for the hp calculation. Maybe the dyno is pessimistic. Maybe the calculation is optimistic. Don't know. But there is a 40% difference in hp measured one way vs the other. The first thing that strikes me is that this could bump Brian, Norm, and myself way down on the hp numbers. I wouldn't expect to make 85% as much power as John Coffey makes with his professionally built stroker running MOTEC and I'm running my home built 2.8L motor which at the time was only 8.3:1 compression. Even if our engines were built exactly the same I should be down 10% by virtue of displacement alone. I also made more hp per liter than Dan Baldwin according to the formulas, and I find that hard to believe. I wouldn't expect Norm to make 235whp with his, and I wondered how Brian could make 278 with moderate compression and a small cam. But then you always hear how you shouldn't compare dyno numbers between different machines on different days, etc, so it really becomes kind of moot really. If you're a drag racer ET and trap speed is what floats your boat, if your a road racer it's whether you can get past the guy in front of you on the straightaway. I'm kinda thinking that HP numbers don't really mean dick. Maybe my butt dyno is the thing I should be concerned with...

I'd like to clarify something jnj. I was digging through some of your older posts and you were estimating 750 hp based on an ET calculator, but dynoed 453 in the same state of tune? I'm just asking because I've been wondering about the accuracy of calculating hp using ET mph and vehicle weight. Any thoughts on that? BTW, you still have twice as much power as me, so I've got a severe case of hp envy either way you calculate the hp...